Christian Emperor Research Articles

Top Boy Crossdressing: The Life of Heliogabalus in the Historia Augusta

Focusing on the Life of Heliogabalus in the so-called Historia Augusta or Imperial History, an anonymous late fourth century CE work, the chapter argues that beautiful rulers who cross dressed with abandon were part of late Roman imperial masculinity and its representation. This was so because the Christian emperor Theodosius was very aware of same-gender or homoerotic attraction as unifying force, which he also employed to strengthen the rule of his sons, made full co-rulers as children. However, as the highly satirical Life of Heliogabalus makes clear, gorgeous, soft young emperors had to maintain and make visible specific power relations. If they could not demonstrate that they controlled their generals rather than the other way round, the power of homoerotic attraction could backfire.

Mythological Aspects of Supreme Power Concept by Eusebius Pamphilus

The article deals with one of the earliest Christian interpretations of the supreme secular power created by Eusebius Pamphilus, Bishop of Caesarea, during the life of the first Christian emperor Constantine the Great. It is proved that the concept by Eusebius contains mythological ideas transformed in a Christian context. In particular, the main focus of the interpretation of the Lord is the recognition of Him as Pantocrator [Παντοκράτωρ – the Lord of all] endowed with infinite power and authority over the Universe. Such an interpretation reconstructs archaic ideas about the deity as the centre of power and says nothing about his mercy and justice. This concept became the basis for the argumentation of the absolute nature of the Christian emperor’s supreme power – Basileus. The Lord, communicating with Basileus through His Son, Christ the Logos, gives him the sacred right to reign and thus makes him godlike [Friend of God – Θεóς, divinely favoured] – an icon of the Lord of all. Another mythological feature of Eusebius’ interpretation of supreme power is the solution to the problematic relationship between the reign and the priesthood. Eusebius believed that the Lord’s endowment of Basileus with the right to reign obliges him to perform priestly functions at the same time. The purpose of Basileus’ priesthood was to enlighten his flock about the essence of the Word of God, and not to observe religious rituals. In this way, the role of the basileus-priest differed from the Patriarch. Thus, the mythological nature of the concept by Eusebius of Caesarea is the fact that he unconsciously replaced various semantic connections. This happened because he could not explain the essence of supreme power and its value to society in a different way. The foundation of Eusebius’ mythological thinking is the beginning of the synthesized rationality (historical understanding of the real past) and myth (substitution of history by religious tradition) of the history of the Byzantine Empire.

The Grand Turk vs. Machiavelli: Understanding Turks in Early Modern Period from Botero's Perspective

In his treatise named "Della Ragione di Stato", Giovanni Botero criticized the issue of reason of state, which was attributed to Niccolo Machiavelli. In general, this concept was based on the idea that religion did not have a binding force for the states, and it was associated with the thought that it was more ideal for an emperor to prefer what was advantageous for himself instead of following the eternal verities of God and Christianity. However, Giovanni Botero suggested the idea that the concept of reason of state did truly exist, but he also believed that the concept was merely based on the codes presented by God, and, accordingly, by Christianity contrary to what Machiavelli believed. Giovanni Botero tried to support his thoughts on the ideal nature of a Christian emperor in his treatise by exemplifying the issue based on Turks. Thus, Turks contributed Giovanni Botero's insights on the ideal Christian emperor with their qualifications on state government, taxes, army structure and military government. The depiction of the "Grand Turk" described the ideal Christian emperor and provided the ideality of this figuration. More importantly, "The Prince" was transformed into "The Christian Prince" by Giovanni Botero.

Constantine and Eusebius in Antioch

In the 320s CE, the eastern metropolis of Antioch became the scene of violent conflict between pro- and anti-Nicene factions vying to put one of their own in the bishopric. Eusebius of Caesarea (himself one of the candidates) claims in his influential Vita Constantini that bloody conflict was avoided only by the calming influence of the emperor himself. This article focuses on three letters that Eusebius included in the Vita Constantini to illustrate the emperor’s involvement, looking for what they can tell us about the sequence of events, and also about the relationship between the first Christian emperor and his future biographer. Scholars have labeled Eusebius as everything from the power behind Constantine’s throne to a sycophant who needed Constantine to protect him from his ecclesiastical enemies. This study reveals an evolving relationship in which the emperor learned to respect Eusebius’s political as well as academic skills.

What did Constantine learn in 325? Constantine’s theological declarations before, at and after Nicaea

The analysis of the corpus of letters of the emperor Constantine, in particular, the one he addressed to the synod of Arles in 314, the one he addressed to the Church of Nicomedia in 325 and the one he addressed to Arius in 333, and of Eusebius of Caesarea’s account of the Synod of Nicaea in 325, allows to evaluate the evolution of the theological representations of the first Christian emperor. Constantine’s interest was not only political, but he also was able to listen to and understand the theological milestones of the controversy.

A Christian Emperor between Pagan Gods

Abstract In recent years, images of rage against monuments have filled the media. Unmistakably expressing a high degree of tension in societies, these forms of hostility against heritage have been diversely interpreted, prompting passionate expressions of support as well as fierce criticism. Contesting public memorials, however, is not a new form of socio-political dissent. During Late Antiquity, for example, a new sensibility towards ancient monuments emerged in the vast territories that were once part of the Roman Empire. In this article, the late-antique fate of the so-called ‘temple of Hadrian’ at Ephesus is analysed as a case-study. The aim is to gain a better understanding of the approaches adopted to accommodate traditional monumental landscapes in the changed late-antique socio-political context. This analysis offers a new perspective on ancient and contemporary phenomena of contestations of monuments.

Constantine’s Radiate Statue and the Founding of Constantinople

This essay challenges the idea that Constantine’s radiate statue on his Constantinopolitan column assimilated the Christian emperor to the pagan deity Apollo Sol, the Radiant Sun. Iconographic analysis of Roman coinage allows us to understand the imperial crown of rays as an attribute of Divus Augustus, Augustus the God. I argue that from Nero through Constantine, the last Roman emperor to use the corona radiata in his portraiture, the radiate crown signified the theomorphic assimilation of the reigning emperor to Divus Augustus. Every man who wore it claimed to be “the Divine Augustus of the Present Age.” The corona radiata was thus at once a religious and an imperial symbol that signified the continuity of the “Augustan line.” My analysis of imperial coinage affirms this conclusion in demonstrating that its uses were independent of the emperor’s personal patron deity, including Sol. These proposals have important repercussions for understanding Constantine’s faith. The religious compromise that the Christian Constantine entered in agreeing to a radiate portrait concerned imperial legitimation. Though a devout believer, the emperor still chose to remain the Divine Augustus in his new city, as that concession signaled something important that he could not communicate otherwise: his new city’s identity vis-à-vis Rome.

Deuteros Theos: Constantine’s Christology at Nicaea

Recent inquiries into the Christology of Rome’s first Christian emperor have produced a more or less “orthodox” image. While it is widely acknowledged that Constantine’s Christian doctrine developed throughout his career, his vision of Jesus at the time of the Council of Nicaea (325 CE) has been regularly cast as a Trinitarian Christology of co-eternality and ontological unity with God the Father. Recent analysis has not, however, taken into account the range of possible interpretations of the available data. By revisiting this data, including Constantine’s Oration, an important letter from Eusebius, the history of the word homoousios, and the Hermetic philosophical tradition, it is possible to locate within Constantine’s views a subordinationist Christology—a Christology which the Council of Nicaea allegedly condemned.

The Translation of St Sylvester’s Relics from Rome to Nonantola: Itineraries of corpora sacra at the Crossroads between Devotion and Identity in Eighth-Tenth-Century Italy

Pope Sylvester I (314-335) became an important figure in the political history of early medieval Italy. His legendary relationship with Constantine I (306-337), the first Christian emperor, played a significant role in establishing his ideological prominence. Declared a saint of the early Roman Church, Sylvester’s relics did not gain much attention until the middle of the eighth century, when they became a source of competition. On the one hand, Roman popes venerated his body in the monastery of St Stephen and St Sylvester, founded by Pope Paul I around 760 inside the Eternal City; on the other hand, the Lombard king Aistulf and his brother-in-law, Abbot Anselm, claimed to have brought Sylvester’s relics north, in order to have them buried in Anselm’s newly founded monastery of Nonantola in the Po Valley. Scholars would appear to have overlooked this major issue when investigating the relationship between Lombard elite society and Roman popes in the eighth century. This article will therefore consider the dates, forms, and narratives of the translatio of St Sylvester in order to evaluate Nonantola’s political and ideological involvement in this »holy« movement. The main argument is that through the »journey« of Sylvester’s relics within the Lombard kingdom, King Aistulf was able to increase his prestige and political influence. For its part, Nonantola rewrote the history of its origins by centring it on the relics of the Constantinian pontiff and those of Pope Hadrian I, in order to claim political and spiritual primacy throughout the medieval period.

Jean Mairet, Théâtre complet, iv: Le Roland furieux, L’Athénaïs, La Sidonie. Textes établis et commentés par Anne Surgers, Marianne Béthery et Hélène Baby

This is the fourth and final volume of the complete theatre of Jean Mairet, containing his last three plays, all tragicomedies, each (as in earlier volumes) with a different editor (all editors have worked under the general direction of Georges Forestier). Le Roland furieux, probably first performed at the Hôtel de Bourgogne in 1638, was published in 1640. Much of Anne Surgers’s Introduction is devoted to the way Mairet reduced Ariosto’s vast epic poem into a five-act play. This analysis is accompanied by a magisterial demonstration of the play’s use of multiple decor. Le Roland furieux seems to fly in the face of Mairet’s earlier commitment to the new illusionism of regular theatre, but Surgers encourages us to resist facile compartmentalization to rejoice in a ‘pièce un peu folle qui renvoie tout le monde dos à dos’ (p. 112). L’Athénaïs, probably first performed at the Hôtel de Bourgogne in 1638–39, was published in 1642. Mariane Béthery’s Introduction makes clear that it is a very different kind of tragicomedy from Le Roland furieux. Its key source is Nicolas Caussin’s La Cour sainte (1623) and it is set in the Eastern Roman Empire of Theodosius II, ending with the marriage of the Christian emperor to the pagan poet and philosopher Athénaïs. It observes the unity of place, but not the unity of time, and is exceptional in being a tragicomedy with a devotional theme, though Béthery finds ambiguities: it is a ‘tragi-comédie amoureuse, sans amour vraiment partagé’, a ‘tragi-comédie chrétienne sans élan religieux’ (p. 338). Mairet’s last play, La Sidonie, published in 1643, may have been performed at the Hôtel de Bourgogne in 1642, but there is no clear evidence to this effect. It is different from both its immediate predecessors, telling a story purely of Mairet’s imagination and set in Armenia with characters whose names sound Greek. Despite some ambiguity about the decor, Hélène Baby argues convincingly that the play is perfectly regular. She makes an interesting argument aiming to justify Mairet’s unique generic designation of the play as a ‘tragi-comédie héroïque’, claiming that the characters’ heroism lies in their unusual degree of moral perfection and their avoidance of confrontation (there is a high number of liaisons de fuite). In this respect, the play foreshadows Corneille’s Don Sanche d’Aragon and Nicomède. Baby’s key claim, however, is that La Sidonie’s lasting mark is on Racine’s Andromaque, since they both depict a female protagonist planning a heroic suicide immediately after marriage: ‘il est temps de rendre hommage à Mairet pour son invention’ (p. 490). All three editors address the negative assessments or downright neglect that have been the fate of these plays. Le Roland furieux ‘mérite d’être redécouvert et rejoué’ (p. 12). L’Athénaïs ‘mérite qu’on s’y intéresse’ (p. 339). As to La Sidonie, ‘à défaut d’infléchir le jugement du lecteur sur la médiocre qualité de cette pièce’, its editor wants to help us to ‘mieux en comprendre les enjeux’ (p. 456). The plays could not have found more sympathetic, eloquent, or erudite editors.

Policy and prophecy. The legend of the last emperor and the iconography of the ruler crowned by angels in Wallachia

The article analyses the occurrence of the iconography of the ruler crowned by angels in Wallachia in the mid-sixteenth century, a late revival of a Byzantine iconographic model with no examples known in Wallachia prior to this date. In the nave of the infirmary chapel of Cozia Monastery (1543), voivode Radu Paisie is depicted crowned by an angel and blessed by Saint Methodius of Patara, an iconographical hapax. The key for decoding the scene is provided by the Pseudo-Methodian Apocalypse, where a coronation by angels episode is found in the legend of the Last Christian Emperor. The frescoes were made in a political climate when anti-Ottoman war plans intensified in Central Europe following the occupation of Buda.

2018 RSJ/CCCU Article Prize Winner: The Princely Woman and the Emperor: Imagery of Female Rule in Benzo of Alba’s Ad Heinricum IV

One of the functions of a panegyric was to interpret and define roles, and across the Ad Heinricum IV (written c .1085/1086), Benzo of Alba developed distinctive images of rulership. He depicted Henry IV of Germany not simply as a Christian emperor ruling within the traditions of earlier Roman emperors, but also as a second Christ. Benzo also presented Adelaide of Turin, ruler of the mark of Turin and Henry’s mother-in-law, as a princely woman. This new category of quasi-regal ruling woman emerged in the eleventh century in response to broader social and political changes. In his letters to Adelaide, Benzo emphasised her princely status and importance to the imperial cause. Using masculine titles, the classical figure of Egeria, and especially the Virgin Mary, Benzo depicted Adelaide as a quasi-regal ruler, advisor, and mediator. Benzo also drew a series of parallels between Adelaide and Henry using similar imagery, titles, and paired figures, such that Adelaide was Egeria to Henry’s Numa Pompilius, and a second Virgin Mary to Henry’s second Christ. Benzo thus created a remarkable image of Adelaide not simply as a ruler, but almost as a female counterpart to the emperor. Yet elsewhere in the Ad Heinricum , Benzo was more circumspect. He stressed that Adelaide was subordinate to Henry, and used more ambivalent imagery to describe her (even comparing Adelaide with Eve). By this means, Benzo’s image of Adelaide as a powerful princely woman was carefully calibrated to preserve both Henry’s pre-eminent imperial status and the traditional gender hierarchy.

Eusebius of Caesarea’s Un-Platonic Platonic Political Theology

Eusebius of Caesarea drew heavily on pagan philosophy in developing the first Christian political theology. His quotations from Plato’s most political work, the Laws, are so extensive that they are treated as a manuscript authority by modern editors. Yet Eusebius’s actual use of the Laws is oddly detached from Plato’s own political intentions in that work, adapting it to a model of philosophical kingship closer to the Republic and applied to the emperor Constantine. For Eusebius the Laws mainly shows the agreement of Christian and pagan morality, while his political theory centers on the establishment and maintenance of a Christian empire under a Christian emperor who is a philosopher-king. His view represents one of the fundamental political options in ancient Christianity, one that influenced later Byzantine political theology, but was largely rejected in the west.

Constantine and the Cities: Imperial Authority and Civic Politics by Noel Lenski

Reviewed by: Constantine and the Cities: Imperial Authority and Civic Politics by Noel Lenski Robert R. Chenault Constantine and the Cities: Imperial Authority and Civic Politics. By Noel Lenski. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2016. Pp. ix, 404. $79.95. ISBN 978-0-8122-4777-0.) The emperor Constantine continues to engender productive debate among historians of the later Roman Empire. Noel Lenski's outstanding new study will be required reading for scholars working on Constantine, late Roman imperial administration, civic identity in the provinces, and the rise of bishops as civic leaders in the fourth century. In contrast to recent approaches that have downplayed the degree to which Christianity was the driving force behind Constantine's policies, Lenski returns to a more traditional view. What is distinctive about Lenski's approach, however, is his reliance on "secular" evidence, especially laws, to establish Constantine's Christian credentials. The heart of Lenski's study is his analysis of a number of interactions between Constantine and the cities of his empire. He argues that Constantine usually preferred carrots to sticks, skillfully leveraging imperial resources to "push cities into actualizing his own conversion at the local level" (p. 179) while largely resisting the temptation to impose his will on recalcitrant subjects. In particular, he demonstrates how Constantine promoted Christianity by using "the tools of law and normative communication available to him by virtue of his office to effect changes in the landscape and culture of cities" (p. 281). Crucial to this approach is Lenski's [End Page 330] understanding of imperial power as constituted and mediated through language; in the dialogues between Constantine and his cities, each side was obliged to take into account the expectations of the other. Such a model allows for complexity in both the messages Constantine disseminated and the responses they generated. Not only were there many different layers in the complex and evolving "archaeology of Constantine's public personality" (p. 47), but cities might engage with those messages selectively and in accordance with their own priorities. Thus Lenski is able to account for evidence that often has been used to question Constantine's commitment to Christianity. For example, Lenski argues that the famous rescript to Hispellum—by which Constantine permitted a city in central Italy to build a temple to himself and his family during the last years of his reign—exemplifies precisely the sort of compromise that was at the heart of Roman imperial governance, for the permission was paired with an important caveat, which Lenski interprets as a prohibition on blood sacrifice at the new temple. Constantine's response to Hispellum's petition was therefore consistent with both the traditional policy of emperors to favor the requests of supportive cities and his desire to chip away at traditional religious practices whenever possible (p. 127). At the same time, Lenski is careful to avoid portraying Constantine as an all-powerful mastermind. To the contrary, he characterizes Constantine's open-handed conferral of powers, privileges, and patronage on the Church and its bishops as stemming from an almost naive exuberance; many of these measures had to be scaled back by his successors because they turned out to be excessive and unaffordable (p. 206). Moreover, Lenski illustrates the degree to which Constantine's ability to bend powerful bishops to his will was inherently limited; it was often Constantine who was being manipulated as rival bishops by turns enlisted his support, defied his authority, or used him to attack each other (p. 283). In sum, Lenski's compelling interpretation of Constantine as both an energetic promoter of Christianity and a political pragmatist successfully unites two facets of this complex emperor that have often been regarded as contradictory. While ecclesiastical scholars may regret the lack of attention given to theological controversies, Lenski's study superbly elucidates Constantine's approach to ecclesiastical conflicts and his own understanding of his role as the first Christian emperor of Rome. Robert R. Chenault Willamette University Copyright © 2017 The Catholic University of America Press

ЖИТИЈЕ СВЕТОГ ЦАРА КОНСТАНТИНА У ЈЕРМЕНСКОМ СИНАКСАРУ ТЕР ИЗРАЕЛА

Тер Израел, ерудита и црквено лице из Јерменије, почетка XIII столећа компиловао је, на основу ранијих извора, синаксар на јерменском језику за потребе цркве те хришћанске кавкаске земље. Уз неке касније допуне, овај синаксар представља прворазредни извор за црквену историју средњовековне Јерменије. У раду ће бити речи о житију Светог цара Константина Великог које је под 21. мајем, односно по старом јерменском календару 14. мареријем, похрањено у овом синаксару. Ово житије у овом раду биће преведено на српски језик уз неопходне коментаре и анализу самог описа живота цара Константина.

Eschatology and Politics in Cyril of Jerusalem’s Epistle to Constantius

Cyril’s letter to Constantius ii on the Jerusalem cross-apparition of 351 has usually been read as a declaration of Cyril’s loyalty during Constantius’ war with Magnentius. However, the letter also includes a discussion that links the cross to the eschatological “sign of the Son of Man” (Matthew 24:30). Modern interpreters have either ignored this eschatological section or assumed that it is aimed at a non-imperial audience. This paper advances a unified reading of the letter that shows how Cyril uses explicit verbal cues and his description of the cross’s appearance and position over the sacred landscape of Jerusalem to prepare his imperial reader for the switch from politics to eschatology. Cyril thus reinforces his portrayal of Constantius as a devout Christian emperor and assures Constantius not just of military success but of the truth of the Christian faith, while still maintaining his own episcopal authority.

Palladas, the Jordan River and Persia

In May of 337 C.E Constantine the Great fell ill and died while preparing for a campaign against Persia. Due to his imminent death, Constantine asked to receive baptism in Nicomedia instead of where he originally desired - the Jordan River. His desire But Constantine’s desire to be baptised in the River Jordan receives little attention from Eusebius in the Vita Constantini and from modern scholars alike. Traditionally, many scholars view Constantine’s late baptism as evidence of his insincere affiliation with Christianity whereas it is now clear that he wished to defer baptism so he could die free from sin. The recent re-dating of the Greek poet Palladas, by Kevin Wilkinson, to the reign of Constantine casts Constantine in a much different light than the religiously moderate leader many want to see him as. Not only did he hold a sincere belief in Christianity, but acted as a benefactor to the church, promoted the spread of Christianity while marginalizing paganism, and founded a Christian capital in the East. Constantine also sent a letter to Shapur II praising the Christian Persians under his rule. His potential baptism in the Jordan River, presumably before his campaign, is an extremely odd and Messianic act – one which was never repeated afterwards by an emperor. It is clear this war was intended to be a crusade led by a zealous Christian emperor. This was not a moderate emperor who laid the foundations for the Christian Empire to flourish but rather an extreme outlier among the tradition of Christian emperors.

The end of Greek athletics in late antiquity

This book presents the first comprehensive study of how and why athletic contests, a characteristic aspect of Greek culture for over a millennium, disappeared in late antiquity. In contrast to previous discussions, which focus on the ancient Olympics, the end of the most famous games is analysed here in the context of the collapse of the entire international agonistic circuit, which encompassed several hundred contests. The first part of the book describes this collapse by means of a detailed analysis of the fourth- and fifth-century history of the athletic games in each region of the Mediterranean: Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt, Italy, Gaul and northern Africa. The second half continues by explaining these developments, challenging traditional theories (especially the ban by the Christian emperor Theodosius I) and discussing in detail both the late antique socio-economic context and the late antique perceptions of athletics.

Constantine and the Cities: Imperial Authority and Civic Politics by Noel Lenski

BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 423 and extended analysis, such as the routinization of magisterial prorogation at the very moment in which Augustus was consolidating his own magisterial powers (41–42), or the Roman “construction” of time as a “social fact” (81–84), or the relationship between the diffusion of Roman citizenship and Roman tolerance for diversity (92–93). Nor is it always clear how, precisely, the various topics are meant to relate to one another. That several observations are introduced “as an aside” (e.g., 55, 66) is symptomatic of Ando’s approach. The discursive style is also reflected in the overall structure of the book. The discussion may well be propelled by a set of underlying propositions, but the book as a whole is not organized to prove a central thesis. Instead of a comprehensive (or even representative) collection of evidence, mobilized to support a core argument, what Ando provides is a series of observations for which the texts cited can serve, at best, as illustrations. No one could reasonably expect formal, causal analysis or falsification of the sort of argument to which Ando gestures, but historians will want more evidence, systematically presented, to buttress the case. Otherwise we are left, in effect, with a bundle of assertions, not an argument. The deficit in explicit argumentation is especially acute in light of two presuppositions that frame the whole discussion. The first is the notion that a “singular linguistic and discursive system” came “to regulate human societies in every way removed from the conditions in which that system had come into being” (6). The second is that “citizenship functioned as a primary mechanism of social differentiation” in the Roman empire, at least until the universal citizenship grant of 212 (88). These propositions reflect Ando’s central concern with the problem of difference, and its management, within the Roman empire. He simply assumes, however, and implicitly asks his readers to assume, that differences between metropolitan and non-Roman societies were in fact profound (ignoring structural similarities in the demographic and economic spheres), and that they should be understood in juridical terms, and that juridical status was more important than (for example) wealth or social power in the articulation of social hierarchies in the Roman world. Alternative viewpoints are not considered, much less contested. As a result, the central claims of the book will only be compelling to those readers who are prepared to accept, a priori, that diversity in the Roman world was primarily a function of formal political organization, and that the Roman empire was maintained above all by the juridical categorization and legal regulation of discrete political communities. It goes without saying that not all readers will accept those premises. Roman Social Imaginaries does, nevertheless, flag a number of interesting and mostly overlooked issues, especially in what Ando might call the underlying “grammar” of Roman imperialist thought, and succeeds in encouraging us to pay closer attention to the cognitive dimension of Roman rule. University of California, Berkeley Carlos F. NoreÄ na Constantine and the Cities: Imperial Authority and Civic Politics. By Noel Lenski. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press (“Empire and After”). 2016. Pp. ix, 404. What did Constantine believe? Noel Lenski adroitly sidesteps this conventional question by highlighting instead the multiple images of the emperor simultaneously in 424 PHOENIX circulation already during his lifetime. But his emphasis on variable perspectives does not become yet another study of the making of Constantine into a Christian emperor. Instead, the innovation of Lenski’s outstanding book is to demonstrate the relevance of the contemporary images of the emperor for the everyday governance of the empire. Lenski’s chapters emphasize the dialogue between an emperor and his subjects. Constantine projected images of himself in his titulature and the images on coins (Chapters One to Three); cities sent him petitions (Chapters Four to Seven). The emperor replied with favors or warnings (Chapters Eight to Ten); cities responded with honorific dedications or loud protests (Chapters Eleven to Fourteen). Even as all the participants followed implicit rules of decorum, the outcomes were often unexpected. Over his long reign representations of Constantine changed repeatedly. Lenski highlights four phases as revealed in portrait...

THE EMPEROR AS A 'MAN OF GOD': THE IMPACT OF CONSTANTINE THE GREAT'S. Conversion on Roman Ideas of Kingship

ABSTRACT In numerous ways, the first Christian emperor, Constantine I (r. 306-337) indicated that he saw parallels between himself and St. Paul. These include his story of divine intervention (the vision of the Cross) and his decision to be buried amid markers for the twelve Apostles. But his biographer, Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, chooses to liken Constantine instead to Moses, who led the Israelites out of captivity. By focusing on the different connotation of "Man of God" (Constantine's preferred label for himself) and "Friend of God" (the phrase Eusebius used), this article suggests that the reason for this difference lay in Eusebius's concern to prevent Constantine - and by extension all future emperors - from asserting priority over Christian bishops.